In our original discussion, we noted that ISPs would have the option to kick people off the web entirely, and in our comments we were attacked by an anonymous person involved in the negotiations, saying we made that up. And yet, the agreement today confirms that kicking users off the web entirely is a possible measure for these ISPs. Of course, the folks behind the plan were careful to try to talk their way around this. They say that it's only the web that gets blocked. Email (um, not if you use web-based email), VoIP "or any security or health service (such as home security or medical monitoring)" will still be allowed to go through. Also the agreement explicitly says that they're not talking about killing anyone's account. This is disingenuous, of course. For most people, having their web access blocked is as good as losing your account entirely. Access to the web is pretty much the whole point of an internet access account these days.

Participating ISPs include AT&T, Cablevision, Comcast, Verizon and Time Warner Cable -- also known as pretty much the only choices the vast majority of Americans have for serious broadband connections. The basics of the plan are a "five strike" plan, rather than the traditional "three." After the fifth strike (and by strike, we mean accusation, not conviction), the ISPs can resort to "mitigation measures":

If, after these educational and acknowledgment alerts, the subscriber’s account
still appears to be engaged in content theft, the ISP will send yet another alert. At
this time, the ISP may take one of several steps, referred to as “Mitigation
Measures” reasonably calculated to stop future content theft. These Mitigation
Measures may include, for example: temporary reductions of Internet speeds,
redirection to a landing page until the subscriber contacts the ISP to discuss the
matter or reviews and responds to some educational information about copyright,
or other measures (as specified in published policies) that the ISP may deem
necessary to help resolve the matter.

Now, the interesting question: will any of this get people to actually buy music and movies again? That seems doubtful. And, of course, it's worth noting that even with this in place, the MPAA and RIAA are insisting that PROTECT IP is necessary. Funny, I thought that the problem was solved once graduated response was in place.

Those behind the plan bend over backwards to claim this is just an "educational" plan. But education plans don't mean people can no longer access the web. Words mean something. On top of that you can pretty much bet that the "education materials" that will be provided will be typically one-sided and misleading.

The other problem with the plan is that it's still based on accusations, rather than convictions, and if the DMCA has taught us anything, it's that people make false claims of infringement all the time. And if you get an alert that you think is wrong? Well, you have to pay to have it reviewed. Now suddenly this can become a "profit center" for ISPs.

Is this plan as bad as three strikes plans found in Europe and Asia? No. But it's still a bad plan. Anything that involves crippling your internet access based on accusations is ripe for serious abuse. Furthermore, there is little to no evidence that this will actually help the RIAA or MPAA and their associated companies. This is yet another case where the industry is so focused on "piracy" they forgot that they have to actually give people reasons to buy. The problem isn't piracy. The problem is their inability to adapt to a changing market.

Whew!

Re: Only the web!

They say that it's only the web that gets blocked. Email (um, not if you use web-based email), VoIP "or any security or health service (such as home security or medical monitoring)" will still be allowed to go through.

a real shame if your medical or home-security system uses a web service...

Re: No problem: Port randomization + encryption

ISP's have strangle holds of areas and the MAFIAA knew that when they designed this stupid 'law'...it's supposed to make it that much easier to ranch on the supposed perpetrators.

And even if they do this crap, it's not going to have them making profits...if anything, it's going to make it WORSE...which is what I'm wishing for. Nothing like watching a company/group that lives off of other people's artistic work for a living going to the shitter...and THAT is a show I'm willing to pay for. :)

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Only the web!

"i dont need to run or hide, you and your kind are way to stupid to scare me"

My sentiments exactly.

When I heard about three strikes, I thought "that's two more than I need". Because the first warning will tell me what I did wrong, and I'll fix it so they won't notice (assuming they notice in the first place ;) ).

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Only the web!

"How many will be connected to their corporate private VPN in sweden downloading 500 gigs a month?"

You don't actually know how torrents work, do you? That explains a lot. (hint: even if you downloaded the torrent file from The Pirate Bay, you're incredibly unlikely to be downloading the file itself from anywhere near them).

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Only the web!

Re: Re: Re: Re: Only the web!

Further checking of what? If your traffic is encrypted, they can check till the cows come home...or do you mean they can circumvent my encryption? Isn't that illegal? ... hey.. that brings up a good point.. what happens if the ISP gets 5 accusations? ATT is gonna be pissed!

Re: Re: Re: Re: Only the web!

"The use a VPN will likely be a trigger for further checking..."

Baaah! Wrong.

Most part of the world uses VPNs connected through SSH tunnels to transfer data in a secure and reliable way. If you mess with that, the entire corporate world + open source project + random assorted people who use SSH will fall on you will a ton of bricks.

If there is one thing you DO NOT want to mess with is the SSH protocol.

And besides, traffic is encrypted. What kind of "further checking" will you do? Especially if pirates get creative and connect 20 VPNs located in every corner of the world together and hop the traffic around? Can you imagine the nightmare it is to sort that out from an investigation point of view?

Re: Re: Re: Re: Only the web!

"Not really. The use a VPN will likely be a trigger for further checking, especially if you are moving a large volume of data over that connection."

A couple of things.

All weblockers need to do is move from http to https and there is no way to monitor what you are downloading. We are already moving in that direction.

I use VPN for work and often download and upload 50+ gigabyte datasets. Any corporation with the slightest sense uses VPN also. Accusing someone based on use of VPN or volume of dta transfered is a non starter. The corporate lawyers will come out in force and sue the pant off the ISP's. The $35 USD fee will not cover the legal costs.

The implementaton of this law will lead to new software for infringment. An interesting historical note is the majority of the software for infringement has come from the US.

Mike, since you and many others are fighting "strikes" laws, fighting application of existing laws, and fighting against any new laws, you shouldn't be surprised that there is pressure in all directions.

I think you really need to understand that the Wild West stage of the internet is going away. Not tomorrow, but every day it gets a little more tamed, a little more under control.

Re: Re:

Please go enjoy your darknets. Just remember not to tell anyone about them, otherwise you get spotted and shut down. So hey, now you can join drug dealers and human smugglers in their efforts not to be seen.

Re:

> Mike, since you and many others are fighting "strikes"
> laws, fighting application of existing laws, and fighting
> against any new laws, you shouldn't be surprised that there
> is pressure in all directions.

Maybe you should ask why these laws are being fought?

They are being fought because they affect innocent people who are not engaged in any copyright infringement. I know you say that targeting such people is not your intent. Maybe I even believe you. But then why are not current copyright laws enough? Go directly after a copyright infringer, with proof, go to court, and win.

Another reason some of your new laws are fought is because they make it everyone else's responsibility for you to do your job -- with liabilities attached that can apply to anyone. It's not anyone else's job to find copyright infringers.

Another reason your laws are fought is because they attach liability to the wrong people. Go get the infringer. Get only the infringer. And get them good. Stop attacking everyone else who did nothing wrong. For example, if someone posts a link to infringing content on a blog, who should you go after?
A) The blog
B) The ISP who hosted the blog
C) The blog owner
D) The site linked to that hosts the infringing content
E) The electric utility company that provided power to any of the above

Try D. If you get the linked to infringing content, the link instantly becomes worthless. Furthermore a hundred other links that you might not know about are instantly equally worthless.

Use the links to find the source of the problem instead of treating the links as the problem. That way an innocent blog, or Google or God knows who else isn't a victim.

Re:

Mike, since you and many others are fighting "strikes" laws, fighting application of existing laws, and fighting against any new laws, you shouldn't be surprised that there is pressure in all directions.

Nobody is fighting against new laws, per se.

We just don't want new laws that turn customers into criminals just because of a single accusation, protect a dying business model, and prevent new forms of content delivery from coming into existence.

The gatekeepers' time has come. They know it, and yet, they don't want to know it. They believe that the longer they can keep trying to put off the future and the present from catching up with them -- and that's not too terribly hard most of the time, thanks to all the lobbyists and lawyers and politicians they've paid off -- the longer they can force people to pay exorbitant prices for movies, music, TV shows, etc. in the way that the gatekeepers want people to see them.

The gatekeepers don't want people to have a choice about how they experience culture; they want people to pay fifty times for the same culture.

Re:

Mike, since you and many others are fighting "strikes" laws, fighting application of existing laws, and fighting against any new laws, you shouldn't be surprised that there is pressure in all directions.

Pressure is only coming from one direction; the entertainment industry. That's the problem. They get to decide how long copyright should be. They often get to decide (through lawsuits) what new technology is allowed. They get to decide what people are allowed to do on the Internet. Why do they get all the power? There are billions of people in the world, while the entertainment industry is run by a few thousand at best. Note that I said "run by", not "employs". Why does such a tiny percentage of the world's population get to dictate laws in favor of themselves to the detriment of everyone else?

I think you really need to understand that the Wild West stage of the internet is going away. Not tomorrow, but every day it gets a little more tamed, a little more under control.

Funny, but in all the history I've read about the "wild west", I don't recall hearing anything about the saloon owner telling the sheriff what laws to pass, or dictating what other businesses can and can't do.

Re: Re:

"Funny, but in all the history I've read about the "wild west", I don't recall hearing anything about the saloon owner telling the sheriff what laws to pass, or dictating what other businesses can and can't do."

I'm pretty sure the guys with the most money have been making the laws for a loooooong time

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Snitches get Stitches means that anyone who talks to authorities (or anyone else for that matter) about illegal activity is going to get a beat down, quite often ending up very, very dead. It's the "code of the hood" as it were.

It's also the code of any darknet. Once someone discloses where the darknet is, it is no longer dark, and easily lit up like a christmas tree. Trying to keep a darknet secret is exactly at odds with file sharing, which requires lots of input and lots of nodes to work effeciently. So when you share the secret with so many people, someone is sure to talk.

Those that talk will get a virtual beatdown. If people start ending up going to jail or paying huge fines or judgements, don't be shocked if things go "real world".

You have to remember also that beyond piracy for the sake of piracy, there are a significant number of people who do piracy for profit. The Pirate Bay guys all deny up and down, but their website was packed full of high priced ads at their peak ($50,000 US a month was a price one company I know was paying). There is a whole lot of money kicking around, and much of it is going to mafia style organizations in east block countries.

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Re:

Yeah these policies have been very effective in the other countries that have already implemented them. In fact in france no one pirates anything anymore and every citizen buys every cd and dvd on release day

Re:

Do you really think you can stop anyone? Really? the Gov the RIAA nor the ISP have the best programs.. We don't work for you... IF a ports open i can connect, if i connect you lose... Only way is to cut the hardline...

SO really all your going to do is have people like me with money to setup an ISP saying hmmm the big boys are doing this... Now i will offer a new service that will not join you, offering a big pipe at a decent price with no strike plan, and no cap... I WIN again... and make even more money...

THANK YOU RIAA for making my day, I get more money and you will get even less and hamstring my competition... LOL

Re: Re:

I hate to tell you but you would need billion to implement an isp that touches even a small percent of the populaiton of the U.S. The fcc is selling spectrum for billions if you want to do it wireless. if you wan to run cable well the phone line people and cable people have passed a lot of laws making it illegal for you to do so the government was supposed to protect the consumer from monopolies but obama has jumped into bed with big media since day one, and the monopolies have neutered any regulatory agencies meant to over see them by hiring half half their staff

Re:

Funny, because every time someone uses that "Wild West" metaphor, I picture them being thrown out of the saloon.

Come on, it's such a useless metaphor. "Wild West?" The Wild West was a land populated by a variety of (more) indigenous peoples, whom we dispossessed and/or slaughtered in order to settle, cultivate, and mine precious resources. The initial settlers had a bad reputation because they might be mauled by bears or raided by indians at any time. I've never been mauled by a bear on the internet.

The West was "tamed" as more and more people moved out into the territories, invested time, money and effort, and demanded equal representation and protection under the law.

The MPAA and RIAA aren't doing that; they're trying to double-charge (services and customers) for the same content pushed over other people's pipes and demanding unequal protection far out of proportion to their population or economic stature (remember, if Google's founders could liquidate their assets without losses, they're worth more than the member corporations of the RIAA put together), and not at the expense of the "wild men" who built it, but the modern settlers.

You're talking about an industry using regulatory capture and government lobbying to criminalize the unwanted behaviors of its own customers, that doesn't fit anything I've ever heard or read about the Wild West. It's a lot more like British Colonial Mercantilism, altho' I suppose you'd rather be Wyatt Earp than Robert Clive.

When can we start submitting accusations

When can we start submitting accusations of piracy against the people responsible for this law (the heads of the RIAA, MPAA, the various ISPs, the lawyers, government officials and so on)? With a little community effort it shouldn't take long to get them all kicked off the internet.

Re: Re: Re: When can we start submitting accusations

We pay a ton of money (over $150) for our Internet and phone and television service. Everything was having problems for a while at one time. Our service provider didn't do much to respond to our general complaints, or they offered to fix it at additional charge. One day, our phone and Internet and cable went out and we threatened to cancel our service entirely if they didn't come and fix it soon. The threat was on a Saturday afternoon. Our service provider said they'll come Monday, when they're open. We said that was unacceptable, they better come now. They said they don't open sooner than Monday and that they can't come any sooner. We said, fine, then we cancel. They changed their mind and came Sunday morning, and they actually fixed the problem this time (we've been having various problems for some time), at no additional charge.

We pay a TON of money for our service. We've been regular customers for MANY years, and they know it (we make them know it when we complain). We simply won't tolerate them treating us, as regular customers, worse than they treat their new customers.

These agreements aside, ISP's don't want to lose business. As customers, we need to make stricter demands. We must demand more. Especially as regular customers. Let our ISP's know that they can't treat us worse than new customers. They can't provide us with worse service at a higher price than new customers (ie: they provide new customers with these better, cheaper promotional services, something that is unheard of in other countries). Let your ISP's know that their government imposed monopoly abuse of the market will not be tolerated by you the customer and they'll listen. Your money is important to them. When it comes down to it, ISP's will not forgo the enormous amounts of money that they make from customers just to please the Maffia.

Re: Re: Re: Re: When can we start submitting accusations

ISP's, the Maffia, the U.S. pharmaceutical corporate gang, the U.S. government, etc... speak one language and one language alone. That language is $$$$$. Speak to them in that language and they'll listen. Put your $$$$ where your words are and they'll bend over backwards to listen.

Re: Re: When can we start submitting accusations

Re: Re: When can we start submitting accusations

None of them have gotten in to any legal trouble for the false claims. If they were to file suit, then the legal precedent would finally be set. I'm all for the plan; let's file all the bogus claims we can!

Re: Re: Re: When can we start submitting accusations

None of them have gotten in to any legal trouble for the false claims.

Educate yourself. They are in trouble everywhere for not paying artists, for tax evasion, copyright law abuse. Browsing techdirt might enlighten you. Checking TorrentFreak may also help a bit.

Ultimately, doing some serious Google research on the topic and not being some myopic copyright zealot might show you that they [MAFIAA and merry friends] are completely rotten and have no moral grounds to accuse anyone.

I will still download whatever I want. WHATEVER. And I'll still buy whatever I like and my earnings allow me, having downloaded it or not. I will still go to the cinemas to have the social experience, to kiss my gf while we wait, to have a good times with friends, EVEN IF I HAVE ALREADY SEEN A CRAPPY TELESYNC OR SOME EARLY QUALITY LEAK.

So, in summary, MAFIAA and all the ISPs can go fuck themselves. And I'm a fucking idiot that supports the same morons that will come after me at some point because I won't bother to hide anything. If they miraculously prevent me from downloading everything I'll save money, I won't be buying things that I could have known about through downloads. Simple as that.

On a side note, I haven't bought a PS3 because it can't be unlocked. At the same time, I already have an Xbox for 3 years, unlocked and with a few dozens of downloaded games. Surprisingly I've also bought 12 of the games I downloaded. Criminal I am.

Re: Re: When can we start submitting accusations

Re: When can we start submitting accusations

You think this law applies to them? Read it again:

"At this time, the ISP may take one of several steps... These Mitigation Measures may include,...
or other measures (as specified in published policies) that the ISP may deem necessary to help resolve the matter. [emphasis added]

Re: When can we start submitting accusations

It's about damn time they started doing this, like everyone else it seems, I was under the impression this was legal for home. However, one I figured out that it is actually Illegal, I quitdoing it!!!! This is only an assumtption, however, I am afriaid that I am correct; unlike most greedy self centered folk around today, I actually have these long forgotten set of "morals", "eithics" and"values", pretty sure a lot of you should look these words up, and actually understand what they mean, and if you're not too far lost into self-centricity you may actually understand WHY people who put their hard work and time into their JOBS only to be dicked (intentionally or as it seems to me, mostly unintentionally) out of their EARNED Income.This is, after all, how Celebrities make a living. Yes, they may be Famous and Rich (although there will be some point where even THEY can not afford to live, because at some time, if this continues unabated, IMO anyway, essentially at they will ALL just become Volunteers! I absolutely do agree with the fact that Copywite Laws as written, due soley to the advent of Technology, are Archaic and nearly impossible to uniformly apply; they were written more to prevent Plagirism rather than monetary THEFT; these Laws should NOT be changed, but, in fact added to, at the very least to end the confusion and to once again protect the rights of Artists, and I use this term Boldly; as a Software Developer is today just as much of an Artist as a Writer is/was when these Laws were written.As stated in the article; it is almsot impossible to determine if you are violating Copywrite Law, even with reaearch, for the reasons stated quite well in the above Article. Add to the confusion, the wordings of the current Laws and the fact the again, IMO, most of the Isers of these services are more than likekely, unaware infact; that while using a Torrent Client is not Illegal, the content available through said Client may infact be "Protected" by Law. Torrents sites also have much to do with the confsusion; as the Author nicely explained, by "buying a premium subscription" it is almost, while not(YOU have to read all the words in the Agreement not just the ones you are looking for!)implying that by doing so, infact you are, as everyone keeps saying "protected", which I am sure most everyone assumes to mean: that by paying for the "Service", this translates into "giving the Artists their owed payment for their WORK"; but, like explained againg perfectly by the Author, are in reality, only funding the Torrent Client's functionabillity and lining some Web Debelopers Pockets. I will however, add: the matter is further distored by the fact that at the bottom of some/most(if not all at this point; (has been awhile since I have checked, and will be never until I can verify), as I refuse to support these site even by providing them with AD Funding by creating a "hit" on said Websites, which in turn triggers a small payment to the Devloper of the Website for "Product Promotion Services"(if you are reading this for the correct reasons, keep that in mind as well)"Torrent Search Engines" actually show at the bottom of your Query(search results list) that "X ammount of content was removed due to MPAAViolations (insert statute # here)", which only means that someone caught them distributing THEIR work.Hence the removal. In fact that statement, if interpreted correctly, means in reality "hey we got caught illegally providing Media to you and had stop until we can figure out how to not get caught again". While the way it is worded and presented to users makes this an almost impossible interpretaion to reach without Legal Knowladge or Research, large ammounts it seems(which is how I found this Article).

Add to that: Laws are generally Vaguly written, intentionally(to allow JUDGES and JURRIES to independently and onjectively interpret the meaning of said law; therefore providing PROTECTION against Directed Legislation and in keeping with our Constitution (USA) The word of Law/Satutes as such is intended to be a form of a type of "Check/Balance" to prevent Laws from becoming one sided, biased or infact even "Illegal"(unconstitutional) in nature! NOT for the reason that I am assuming these "removals" are posted; false reassurenent ans feed, providing false "proof" that their service actually follows and endoforces CW Laws.Why would they? They would lose "hits" and therefore Money...you get the picture thus far I am sure of this.The fact that ISPs are giving their Users "Strikes", in reality shows that yes, CW laws are very hard to interpert, but, that they should be evaluated by the User="YOU"; again, proof of this is actually in the Documents everyone is pissed about! Anyone every heard the old phrase "Three Strikes, Your Out"? It actually refers to the Law, not Baseball. As in, you are allowed to commit Two non-major, non-violent and in most cases this principal may be applied(ie: each diffrent TYPE of fellony you can commit twice, in most cases) and walk away with basically a slap on the wirst in comparision to the actual severity of the Crime. This was done for Two reasons; First and foremost, as a chance for decent people who simply made a mistake, have a mental issue, or are willing to, to NOT do "it" again, the fact that you get TWO chances, at least, before they throw your ass in jail is honestly a gift; as one "Strike" should be enough to get the point across! Fact of the matter is, you already get your "Three Stikes" from your ISPs, plus, they have gone ABOVE and BEYOND on the Fourth infration(aka Violation of The Law)by providing ACTUAL Education as to CW Laws and what exactly they are, mean, cover, were created for, and how to Violate and NOT Violate said laws, again remember this the Fourth time you have gotten caught breaking the law...ONLY because they and the judicial system undstand that, due to the fact that CW Laws ARE out of date AND confusing, even to Lawmakers at this point, I feel is the rationale behind their idea! Add to that the fact you get Two MORE chances after you have been correctly informed of the Law(s) and CONTINUE to break them, even then, they only allow themselves the OPTION of reporting you; not to the Authorities(depending on WTF you download anyway)but, rather than to the actual OWNERS of the products you have stollen, and even then, IT IS UP TO THE OWNERS of the work if you end up in court for Violations reported. Peronally, I think if you are on this site reading this, unless you actually are moral and understand that there are REAL PEOPLE in this world besides yourself, or are just curious or unsure about the Laws, YOU ALREADY know what you are doing is wrong at the very least, and based on the amount of posts regarding how to "hide" using VPNs, so on so forth, coupled with the FACT that if you have already recieved a warning(mind you a warning is a warning), you not only already KNOW it's wrong, but you already KNOW IT'S ILLEGAL!!!! Add on to the fact that not only are you KNOWINGLY(as evidenced by this thread itself) breaking the law you "don't understand", you are ACTUALLY trying to "get away with it" and in reality all you are doing is adding to the list of possible Civil Actions that could be taken against you, and NOW you are actually commiting "real" crimes, yeah, ones with out the confusion of CW Laws: Conspiricy to commit Larsony(Grand Larsony, depending on what/how much you are at this point KNOWINGLY stealing), electronic theft, ID theft(by using Onion or such, because you are in reality actually only being routed through OTHER's Servers, you are "stealing/paying some else to steal for you" the ID of the User of that server, Electronic Fraud(because you are trying to convince your ISP or whoever you think can't figure out who or where you really are(WRONG in your assumption again and a good thing for many reasons), Interfering with a Civil/Criminal investigation you got your warnings, right?), and even the possiblility of some off the wall, but yet enforcable charges, depending on what is on the server/terminal you are "hiding though" therfore claiming to own(content included) even though you have no way of knowing what is on said server(however, still your responsiblity because you, after being made aware of the fact the "they know" you STILL continue to use!!!! How about STOP and don't worry about it!!!! Seems like the right course of action to follow if you, like myself and many others have, once they finally figure out that it IS illegal; or/and in my case anyway, put youself in the Artists shoes.For the record I am a Musician and would gladly and have GIVEN my work to people, because in my case, it's not a JOB!!!! For most Artists however, their WORK(s) are their income...ever wonder why so many Celebrities are having to file for Bankrupcy or having to downgrade their EARNED lifestyle?!

I was told by someone, who I refuse to name(due to the fact that they are someone who has been in the Production/Preformance of the Recodered Arts for over 20 years and I'm sure would not appriciate a bunch hate mail from those they have watched DESTROY the Music Industry) when trying to starting a Recording Studio, "Before you waste your time, just remember, now a days, this is an act of love, not a career or way to support your family." -This is why i didn't: I don't need to eat out of a trash can, as well as my Artists after busting our asses to provide everyone with apparently Free HARD WORK and TIME and not to mention the money alone it takes to record, mix, produce, master. render. re-master, brand/promote and release an album, even for a well established Artist. Just incase anyone is unaware; Musicians DO NOT make a living, or even close to, through Album sales and haven't since Napster, it is all done through touring, which takes even Harder work and even more Time and can/has ruin their Relationships with their Families and caused Artist Suicides!!!! Good thing is, no one has been able to figure out how to en-mass STEAL concert tickets or Authorized Merch yet(ok yeah, everyone knows how to steal a T-Shirt, but, Psychologically speaking, the vast majority WILL NOT steal Merch while at an Event for that Aritist. Reason being; a little thing called GUILT(also, the reason this thread is up; people looking for a justification to ROB Artists of their hard EARNED wages.).Since it seems like everyone has become so self-entitled and so closed minded I have to drive my point home on an actual One to One Level(meaning if it doesn't directly effect YOU, you/we don't care or try to)...here goes, best I can do based on my profiling of almost everyone's post(mind you I don't or most likely don't know you, if this is incorrect as applied to YOU(one, an individual, not the mass of posters; I am sorry if you are offended by my comments.) However if you are not offended my comments, you don't fall into that group, so please, don't try to convince yourself that you are offended if you really arn't...what you would be doing is, again Psychologically Speaking, called "Deflection" this happens alot when people know they are wrong and when confronted with the fact that they are, the response is always either (false)offense to statements, anger at person making them, extreme defensivness, denial, and assumpton that the person making the statement is wrong; how do you think your parents knew you were lying as a kid?

Best way to One to One this on the internent is, and this applies to ALL of us, myself included: Imagine one day, YOU come up with amazing idea for a product/idea and have no idea how to create/market it. So, you enlist the help of an "Invention Submission Company", without having your idea Copywritten as Intellectual Property first...Two, Three months go by and you hear nothing about your submission, assume it was not that good of an idea, brush it off and eventually stop thinking about it; jump ahead One Year; bored, broke and wondering how you are going to make it until whatever type of Check you are waiting for arrives, and you just happen to see YOUR INVENTION on TV for sale at $20 a unit, you absolutely are going to be pissed and immediatly try to figure out how to sue wherever your submitted your idea to...problem is, you can't or atleast not so and win, because in reality, YOU(because the idea was never Capywritten as your, you gave it to the Company, and most likely paid to do so, YOU, IN THIS CASE ANYWAY have no right to ANY compensation for your idea, beacuse, YOU GAVE IT TO THEM!!!!

Now, HERE IS THE IMPORTAINT PART: take same feelings you have about not getting paid for "YOUR" theoretical idea, which in reality stopped being yours once you sent it some where w/o it being copywritten, apply those feelings to Artists; who do, have and will continue to Copywite their work("ideas")to make sure this doesn't happen to them, hence the reason for their anger, you ARE robbing them!!!! Just be thankful, most Artists are also the type of people who for the most part wouldn't even mind if you downloaded their Work, except for the fact that they put THEIR time, effort and money into creating that FOR YOU. I think it would be appropriate to Pay them for their Work just as you Pay the Chef at a nice place to eat, by simply paying the Bill your Server leaves you.

I am right along aside everyone in the fact that, no, I don't own a CD player, and yes, electronic storage or enjoyment of Music IS the new way of things, however this does NOT make it free or OK to steal it.Personally, I hate iTunes and refuse to use that service to PAY for the music I listen to and enjoy on a daily basis, not because of the Price, but because of limited content. I chose to use Spotify Premium to PAY the Artists and Discover more to either PAY by listening to their Tracks(this is done automatically w/no extra charge) or to figure out I'm not so into(keep in mind, that Artist still was paid royalties for me listening to their track even though I didn't do anything other than listen) I can stream and sync music to mulitiple devices, I can, as long as I continue to pay the $10 a month for the Premium service, use the service Offline also!!!! If Sportify,if not your taste,pick one there are many other providers like them and all only cost around $10 a month for UNLIMITED service, assured quality, all while PAYING THE ARTISTS ROYALTIES THEY ARE OWED...how muc do those VPN and Hide me this and cover my ass Services cost a month? Most likely more than $10! They even have the same Services for Movies, TV Shows, Games and anything elae you could, before now, justify to yourself to STEAL, it just takes more effort than clicking the "Steal", sorry "Magnet" link on a Torrent site, but, I'm pretty sure you all can handle it...remember everyone there was a point in time when Technology didn't exist and humans had to put forth thought and effort into problem sovling, I have faith we can ALL handle it again!

Remember: Creating any type of Art(music, images, movies. books, media of anytype infact; takes SKILL, which is why YOU are not an Artist, just a common criminal, depriving Hard working Artists of their livelyhood, that's all, no biggie...right? I'm sure you would be fine if you went to Work for Two Weeks and your Paycheck never came, wouldn't bother you, you would just let it go AND rightnback to work the next day, then knowing, you may never get paid for what you are doing, I know damn well I would NOT be OK with that, and if you think/claim you would, I won't call Bullshit, but, I will ask you to try this: take the next Check you get and BURN IT! Now, if you are OK with doing that, by all means Download away, as you are onveously a liar(but, yet still a theif.) If you are NOT OK with that concept, get away from your Computer, remove head from Ass,and re-evaluate your way if thinking, because in that case you are not only a theif, but also, a hippocrate and a liar to boot!

****PS: If you still it's OK, legal or "cool", or worse yet; that you "arn't hurting anyone so even it's Illegal, I don't care"; just ponder this, the day Paul Walker passed away, his Studio Announced the release of a F+F6 Special Edition of which most, if not all of the proceeds(money people spent to BUY the Movie)would go to either Paul's Family or to his many Charities, right...yes! OK, here is the one thing, if any, from what I have said you taken in...just think about this for a Second then ask; how many people downloaded that "Special Edition"? Yes, unfortunatly Paul Walker is gone, someone who I'm sure you claimed to like and were sooooo saddened by his passing. But, how many of you actually supported his family and charity work (by BUYING the Film)something he was more passionate about than Acting or even Cars(which is saying a lot, unless you knew the REAL Man he was)and how many of you just decided to Download the "Special",and I only quote the word Special here because it was and is...For once a Production Studio has found it in their hearts to Donate their Time, Efforts and Money(porential imcome earned from LEGITIMATE sales), did you? I admit, I had never seen the film and if course my buddy downloaded it right away, again blown away by Bro's preformance...but, only because I knew I was going to AND DID(most importaint part)go out the day the Film was officially released and bought Two copies on Blu-Ray, and one on DVD, however I did actually watch it with him. Just for the record; I HAD NO JOB AT THE TIME, and have yet to own and most likely will not ever own a Blu-Ray player, and NO! I did NOT return them, infact I have never even opened them! Anyone else consider doing that FOR PAUL, or to contiunue his Legacy of caring and generosity? I would assume maybe One or Two of you, now out of those Two(me not included), who didn't Sell/Return(or attempt to)their Copies of the Film???? This statement has nothing to do with me thinking that I was/am better in anyway than anyone else for doing that, as we ARE ALL the same!However, I really would beg of you to think about my words FIRST,before you hit the "Rob This Artist" button ever again.

Re:

That. Mike isn't a pirate, a file sharer. Or so I believe. Thus he might not know that many of those "filthy criminals" the moronic MAFIAA stooges are after are probably among their best customers. Talking from personal experience.

Re: And in related news...

We could always go back to posting our stuff on Usenet! Hell, I still download a boatload of stuff from Usenet and my ISP can't see what I am downloading because I use an anonymous Usenet service with 256bit encrypted connection to it both ways.

Usenet is full of SPAM and malware these days, but I still find what I want on there and work around it. It could be cleaned back up a bit and brought back to life. There are more than one way to skin a cat and the ISPs would have to constantly figure out ways at detecting us doing anything.

Re: Re: Re:

Doesn't show you all the results, makes you click an additional link to display all the results from the same poster. Doesn't let you use Shift-click to select a range of files. Doesn't index nearly as many groups as Binsearch.

Five Strikes and you're dead?

This is getting very tiresome and boring. The ISP's want to cut off 'illegal' down loaders on nothing more than suspicions of wrong-doing. Where's the proof? In the ether, like all of this should be.
Until they get court orders to do it, with the accompanying 'evidence' of wrong doing, they should just stop this crap.
Isn't it enough that they're capping everyone's bandwidth and so they'll get more money for fewer people? Oh, right-they're going to educate us all on illegal downloading with materials provided by MPAA and RIAA.
Speaking of those two organizations-what they get out of it? Money is a good bet. How? I have no idea but I'm sure there's a quid pro quo tucked in there somewhere, unless I'm missing a clue.

"The other problem with the plan is that it's still based on accusations, rather than convictions"

That's a problem, people constantly accuse people of stuff all the time. IP trolls have falsely accused Mike Masnick of being a pirate multiple times.

I think part of the reasoning behind this bill is to make it more difficult for independents to provide free content. Doing so could get them accused of infringement which could eventually threaten their Internet connection.

It's just the U.S. governments attempts to establish monopolies on everything all over again, just like they wrongfully did to everything outside the Internet.

5 strikes

What about banking? What about people who do all of their shopping, including most of their food staples via the internet because they are disabled? What about support groups for cancer patients and the like? People LIVE on the internet and I think I remember something about Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. This could take the Life part out of the equation not to mention the other two.

I think the ISPs will drag their feet as far as implementation. There is nothing in it for them but lost customers. And talk about disingenuous, what does Verizon think folks use those 30 mbps connections are for?

Lose Lose Lose

It looks like they've found the perfect plan...to make everyone miserable.

MPAA will never be satisfied. They'll obviously experience no increase in sales due to this measure, and will complain it's because the regulations aren't tight enough.

Customers will be pissed off on a regular basis after Grandma gets kicked off the net because her pesky grandkids wanted to hear some Lady Minaj

I'm sure ISP's aren't thrilled about having a bunch of extra work to do to handle these requests. While it is pointed out they could make some money from challenges, I doubt it will equal what they spend to keep the report/alert/challenge process running.

Internet just isn't fun anymore.

Eventually every new technology gets trashed. The regulators pretty much kill innovation. The big money guys pretty much kill any hope of an individual making a buck. You need only look at the history of radio, FM, TV, cable, citizens band, etc to see how what started as a great place for experimenters became commonplace and eventually hostile to anybody trying something new. How many great internet ideas are now dead? Remember when ebay was cool and you could make some money? Today its a second class amazon wannabe. This website is one of the last that lets you comment without surrendering your email and privacy. Now that every computer illiterate person is on the net there is little exciting stuff happening. Getting a new computer is about as exciting as buying a microwave oven. And now, instead of ending a few of our government wars we will be paying for a new one; the War on File Sharing! More doors to be kicked in and more kids computers to be smashed and all paid for, one way or another, by you and me. I'm no Luddite but I'm beginning to think that the new way to be on the edge is to see how much technology a guy can do without. Too bad. It once was a lot of fun.

After observing RIAA's actions over the last several years, I've concluded that they must be engaged in a campaign to drive down music sales by pissing off the music-buying public. While I don't understand the rationale for their campaign, it has almost certainly been a success.

Re:

It's kinda like tobacco companies and their business model. Sure you're driving away current customers due to (anger, death, whatever) but there are more customers being born every minute who are not suffering the pains and anguish associated with your product (or behavior).

They can keep shitting on people forever because 16 year olds on itunes will keep pumping in money at $1.29 a song.

Re: Re:

As a developer and designer this will literally cripple me. I work remotely for clients, typically freelance, and VERY regularly transfer large RAW images and other files. There are tons of people who work just as I do.

This "law" will effectively shut me down if it is implemented and executed upon. Within a month they'll accuse me well over their 5 strikes and every one will be a false claim. The fact that I would then have to pay to have it investigated effectively means that I have to pass that cost along so in the long run I end up pricing myself out of the market. Just a minor stumbling block I immediately see... regardless of the other issues.

Hmmm, if their "law" literally shuts down my COMPLETELY LEGAL career I wonder if I could sue them? ;)

Re:

Freelancers are illegal. The law must directly and indirectly ban then. You must work for big corporations and benefit them at your expense. You must get paid slave wages for doing all the work for your corporate masters that get paid to do absolutely nothing. You must not be allowed to compete with big corporate profits, you must be forced to either contribute to big corporate profits or go out of business.

It's the way of the U.S., where the government establishes monopolies on almost everything. No free market capitalism exists in this country. It's all corporate socialism.

Re:

Re: Re:

"Not really. Just get a commercial internet connection for your business, and you won't have issues."

WTF are you talking about? Are you saying if he shells out for a comcast business connection he won't get accused anymore? If thats the case what is to stop every habitual pirate from switching to a business connection? A lot of pirates already use them because they don't have a handicapped upload rate.

sweet he only has to pay 2-3 times as much for internet to keep doing his job

In our original discussion, we noted that ISPs would have the option to kick people off the web entirely, and in our comments we were attacked by an anonymous person involved in the negotiations, saying we made that up.

Here we go again with the half-truths. Currently, and as before; the ISP's have the ability to kick people off of the web entirely. That fact did not change by virtue of this Memorandum of Understanding. What is also true is that the specific mitigation measures in the MOU do not include kicking people off of the web.

These Mitigation Measures may include, for example: temporary reductions of Internet speeds, redirection to a landing page until the subscriber contacts the ISP to discuss the matter or reviews and responds to some educational information about copyright, or other measures (as specified in published policies) that the ISP may deem necessary to help resolve the matter.

The only veiled reference to being kicked off is in the last sentence, or other measures (as specified in published policies) that the ISP may deem necessary to help resolve the matter. That sentence clearly refers to ISP policies that pre-exist the MOU.

You also fail to mention that the appeals process becomes available before any mitigation measures are implemented. That means that you've already received 3-4 notices and failed to address the problem. Furthermore, the cost is $35 and you can petition to have it waived.

So your suggestion that existence of this MOU now allows a user to be kicked off of the internet is an outright, self-serving deception. One only needs to read the current terms of service with their provider to see that this has always been a possibility.

Re: Re:

Christ are you slow. The reference to being kicked off of the internet is the reference to the fact that the current terms of service (which include being kicked off) still apply. The ISP's could have kicked you off yesterday for a single infringement with no warning whatsoever. Today you get 3-4 and still probably won't get kicked off. You're welcome!!

Re:

"You also fail to mention that the appeals process becomes available before any mitigation measures are implemented. That means that you've already received 3-4 notices and failed to address the problem. Furthermore, the cost is $35 and you can petition to have it waived."

Note that this is per incident, not a general situation. If you deal with RAW files, zipped or tarred bundles, corporate videos / virtually any non-MPAA / RIAA media file, you're still talking about file sizes that will immediately create that red flag regardless. Having to contact them a few times a week will take TIME and if even a small fraction of them require that $35 then its an additional cost. If you can petition to have it waived then it simply means it takes additional time and paperwork.

This will negatively impact a huge number of individuals (home videos being sent to relatives, enthusiast photographers sharing pics, etc.) as well as small, medium, and large businesses that rely on transferring files to mention only a few obvious instances. The lack of foresight on any of the officials involved in this, regardless of company, shows their complete and utter ignorance of the very infrastructure that we have in place and how it is used today by virtually everyone.

Not only does it affect the end user in an invasive and disruptive manner across the board but it also puts the provider into a policing position. This forces them to implement a completely new process / expense within their business model. The cost may be $35 per incident now but what about the increase in taxes or fees that will happen due to the overall increase in operating expenses? Who monitors the provider to ensure that they're doing what they are now required to do? The media companies? The feds? Who pays for that expense? What tax gets added to cover that cost?

It will do one thing well; put the United States further behind other countries in multiple ways. I chalk this one up as another complete failure to handle a situation properly and punish the consumer. The good news, it brings the system that much closer to collapse. The bad news, they faceplanted another opportunity to start fixing things with one small change.

Re: Re:

"Note that this is per incident, not a general situation. If you deal with RAW files, zipped or tarred bundles, corporate videos / virtually any non-MPAA / RIAA media file, you're still talking about file sizes that will immediately create that red flag regardless."And not just non-**AA files... what about my household? All 4 of us use Pandora and/or Netflix/Hulu to watch stuff. I'm sure that I use quite a bit of authorized content... at what point am I going to be flagged? And, as you mentioned, who's going to have to pay for the increased cost of monitoring? The customer, of course.

Re: Re: Re:

"All 4 of us use Pandora and/or Netflix/Hulu to watch stuff. I'm sure that I use quite a bit of authorized content... at what point am I going to be flagged"

It's worth noting that traffic from Netflix currently outpaces torrent traffic by a significant margin - at least in the US where you're allowed to access it (note the different between US and European torrent traffic, then consider that most Europeans don't have a Netflix equivalent). Torrent traffic drops in significance when legal options become more attractive, who knew?

These rules are being attempted by those delusional enough to not see that the old models will not work in today's society, and those who stand to lose the most when their Canute act fails. Your home business and access to legal content is irrelevant to them as long as they *think* they're making more money like this. They're wrong, of course, but sadly they wield the power. For now at least.

Re:

There's nothing deceiving about this article. An ISP can disconnect you based on accusations. It was true before this agreement and it's still true today. That is not deceptive. However it is a terrible policy that certainly won't lead to more sales of CDs, DVDs, MP3s or Blurays. It may lead to more customers for the few small ISPs out there that haven't been bullied into playing cop.

Re:

Second example, "redirection to a landing page until the subscriber contacts the ISP to discuss the matter or reviews and responds to some educational information about copyright"

Ok, so "Technically" they aren't being kicking people off the internet, they are restricting people to ONE page of the internet..... so that makes it all OKAY right.

Since they aren't really kicking people off, just restricting them to one 'landing' page (that will probably be filled with ads and propaganda about 'morality' and 'equity' or similar examples of their cognitive dissonance... do as we say, not as we do).

I checked my ISP terms of service, and nowhere does it say if a third party doesn't like me, my ISP can kick me off the internet....

Wait a minute.......

If the United Nations declared Internet access a "human right", and we are part of the United Nations, how the hell can we legally kick anyone off the web?... and If i DO get disconnected, shouldn't I be able to bring this offense before the world court?

"It specifically says ..."including on the grounds of violating intellectual property rights law, to be disproportionate and thus a violation of article 19, paragraph 3, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights."

Re: Re: Discount?

They lose so much money trying to fight piracy because they are trying to fight piracy. It costs a shit ton of money to fight against piracy while those who work around it (creators of torrent protocols, etc) do it for free and are much better at it. This will only bring the ISP's many lawsuits which will increase the price of subscription services from these ISP's if it does anything.

Eventually there will be free internet everywhere and all these greedy ISP's will fail in grand style.

The punishment doesn't fit the crime.

When THEY talk about piracy I assume they mean p2p, torrents, etc. Now usually this is independent of web access. Oh I know you usually get the torrent from a website but you could just as easily get it in an email, from a newsgroup, from IRC, or from a scrap of note paper somebody passed to you. So the web disconnect is the punishment only because its the only way they can think of to hurt you. Just like out beloved government takes away somebodies drivers license because they didn't pay child support or return a library book or whatever, these characters will threaten to turn off your web access knowing that about kills it for paying bills or reading the newspaper or, ironically, accessing legal audio and video sites. High school all over again: you insult a teacher and now you can't go to the dance. I tell you I'd vote for the devil if I thought he would pull the plug on this rubbish! Then again they also threaten to kill your connection entirely, don't they? And I suppose you will be obligated to pay the cable bill all the same. Why not dispense with elections altogether and just let the MPAA run the whole country?

Re:

Re:

Doesn't work. They will chalk those losses down to piracy and fight for even more restrictive laws. They'll fail eventually either way, but the restrictions they get in place in the meantime won't go away.

so they warn you they cut you off or slow you down, what s the first thing you do well if me the first thing i do is cancel any direct debit at the bank. second then talk to em but with one point they wont like no matter what the outcome I gone to another ISP.
I know in the USA that not so easy as in the UK where we have hundreds of ISPs. but how many would need to be cut off and cancel their account before the ISPs start to think maybe not such a good idea. Then off course their are those who would boycott that ISP for just thinking about this and I hate to mention anonymous.

Re:

That's a problem when you start putting computers on the witness stand. They might be lying. I'd like to think that your scenario would hasten the realization that IP address don't equal people but in reality I think what would happen is that you would be screwed.

pay to protest

I find the idea of having to protest a false accusation that you can be penalized from is insane. Maybe charge the content folks to MAKE a accusation and force them to have their ducks in a row. this will end badly.

Lets give them a taste of their own medicine

If they think this is such a great thing then people should accuse the entertainment executives, the politicians, and the ISP executives of copyright infringement a couple hundred times. Then lets see how supportive of this they are.

I think I can accuse them of stealing my copyright on my walking gait or maybe the songs I create and sing in the shower. We are all intelligent people, we can get very creative with it. This could be a fun way to punish these guys.

Re: Lets give them a taste of their own medicine

Can't Wait

I can't wait for this shit to happen with a 2 year contract type of internet plan. It's going to be a lot of fun to watch ISP's get dragged into court for breach of contract when they cut off your internet but STILL insist you have to fulfill the rest of your 2 year agreement and pay the rest out. Get me some popcorn.

Re: Re: Can't Wait

"I'd read your current TOS. Almost certainly has an arbitration clause (sorry, no court) and what happens if you are terminated for misconduct is probably already spelled out."

That doesnt matter. What matters is you would have THOUSANDS of people (or hopefully will) protesting/suing/arbitrating getting cut off within a fairly short time. That should get some attention of the people who run these ISP's, when they suddenly have to go to even arbitration a few thousand times.

Gross amusement

There's a growing trend to considering internet access as a basic need, just as existing law requires telephone and electric companies to provide connectivity. (Though they can still shut it off for nonpayment)

I will be grossly amused at how "N strikes" policies will be reconciled with policies which have Internet access as a basic needed utility. A person can be evicted from a domicile for not having electricity or running water. Could they be evicted for not having internet access? What then?

Re: Gross amusement

Re: Re: Gross amusement

This comment is funny for so many reasons:

1. the french government already enacted a policy similar to the one you support so much so maybe you should go join them, unfortunately we cant get rid of you that easily because like anything the french government tries to do its already floundering ( I wonder if American's will get the policy frozen faster and if that would make us more or less 'Merican in your eyes)

2. the policies he mentions, required utilities to homes, is an longstanding and fantastic American policy and being such a 'Merican you should be proud of it, unless you think getting rid of it may be a another "good" way to save on the budget without raising the taxes of the top 5%

3. making the internet a public entity would bring it under governmental regulation and seeing as how that is controlled by business interests I would think you would support it

4. required basic need technologies are still run by private companies so I don't see why having them has anything to do with socialism, unless Com-Ed is a non-for-profit and I never noticed

5-so many. other things not worth typing out that revolve around you being racist and/or ignorant.

Re: Serious Question...

The answer is no. If you own a copy of a movie through legal means (let's say by purchasing the DVD) then go and obtain a copy through an illegal source, you are infringing. Why? 'Cause Disney says so that's why! You got a problem with that?!

Re: Serious Question...

Good question. Are you intending to keep the copy forever? That isn't really similar to going to the theater or renting. A better example would be if you bought the DVD then lost it or it became damaged. It's also complicated by the third party in your scenario. The entity that you downloaded the movie from. Since the copy is created on their website, I believe it would be them and not you infringing. If you are using torrents, you are uploading to others so you might be in trouble that way. You could argue that you only uploaded a small fraction of the movie. I don't think most people are willing to defend themselves though and most judges aren't willing to listen.

My question is why should you consider this at all? It is legal to buy and sell used copyrighted works but the industry considers this as bad as infringement. There are other examples of legal acts that the software/music/movie companies would stop if they could. Why handicap yourself? Why not just use your own judgment about what is right and wrong.

Re:

Doesn't bother me

All this is going to do is make people aware of encryption software to stop their ISP from seeing what they are doing. Then the music industry will have to think up a way to make such software illegal. It's a never ending vicious cycle.

RIAA, MPAA, give it up. You're outnumbered, and we've got you surrounded. Come out peacefully with your hands up, and slowly put down your music licences in the public domain.

I haven't read all the comments but I read the MOU and several articles about it (I even wrote a post about it in my blog... in Spanish). But I have a question about the "open Wifi defense" that the "pirate" can use only once. This question came to me while using my computer in an Starbuck in Buenos Aires ¿What will happen to the Starbucks of USA that offer open wifi? Of course, I don't know if Starbucks offers open wifi up there...

Re:

At this time, the ISP may take one of several steps, referred to as “Mitigation Measures” reasonably calculated to stop future content theft. These Mitigation Measures may include, for example: temporary reductions of Internet speeds,

That doesn't stop file sharing; it only slows it down.

redirection to a landing page

That doesn't even *affect* file sharing, which is mainly not done via the web.

Also, I foresee a lot of proxies springing up in the near future that accept http connections on port 8080 for all those poor innocent victims of false accusations who find their outbound port 80 traffic blocked (er, "redirected") by these morons.

And meanwhile the US falls further and further behind in broadband. Even its neighbor Canada has abysmal internet access quality; these are first world countries with third world network infrastructure, folks. Worse: G8 nations with third world networks.

And if you get an alert that you think is wrong? Well, you have to pay to have it reviewed. Now suddenly this can become a "profit center" for ISPs.

Who needs an ISP when there are so many unsecured Wireless Networks around?? I can just cruise around with my Laptop anytime and grab a network, or just sit in my apartment and I have my choice of 4 of them. What ISP? Any capable networking professional knows of ways to bypass the traditional pipes.
You wanna be a Pirate, then do it right. The real criminals are always undetectable.